2010 College Football Thread

Coaches come and coaches go...many have changed places for the start of this year, I can't even begin to make a comprehensive list.
However the news to really begin the year...

Lane Kiffin leaves Tennessee after 1 year, 7 wins, alot of talk, a few 'minor' ncaa violations for USC. Couldn't hack it in the best conference in the land, so heads back out west (with daddy in tow as well). Okay, he has alot of history at SoCal, but there's alot of baggage coming with this.

Bye Lanie, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

"Whatever beer I'm drinking, is better than the one I'm not." DMLW
"Budweiser sells a product they reflectively insist on calling beer." John Oliver

He left too soon I think. He needed maybe a year or two, and he would have had Florida, Alabama, and LSU on their knees. Which although I would have enjoyed, would have made another SEC team better than average, and we wouldn't want that now would we?

USC is one of the four or five places, that no matter what job you have, you would take. The funding, pay, and facilities are much better than anything Tennessee could have provided. Not to mention the ability to recruit better and level of national prominence in the past ten years. It was a good move IMHO. (Florida, Ohio State, Texas, Notre Dame, Penn State..haha, are the others if opened up, people would jump).

I think it will be interesting to see next year how Notre Dame with Kelly, USC with Kiffen, and Tuberville at Tech will make their programs go. Tennessee is going to lose a ton of recruits and have hired the new assistant as interim. Unless they get someone great, they are going to be hurting bad next year. Florida with the possibility of losing Urban.

With so many young players leaving for the draft, it will be an interesting year. The Florida offense without Tebow, the Texas offense without McCoy or Shipley, Oklahoma without Bradford or Grisham, Alabama defense without Terrence Cody or Javier Arenas. Lots of the big dogs are losing their backbones. I think the preseason top 10 will be as follows:

Although Boise State probably deserves the number one slot, I am sure Alabama has some right to as well, since they won the NC...

Pryor will be great, as he showed in the Rose bowl, and with a stronger offensive line, will be pretty tough. Tressel although losing a lot of defensive guys, has never had a problem getting the D ready. Texas will be fine with their now game ready QB, Oregon has everyone important back including Masoli, who played well in the Rose Bowl. Florida is losing a ton, and depending on Meyer, may not be ranked in the top 10. Iowa is going to be tough again. Wisconsin is only losing one offensive player, and Clay is back, so they will rush to a pretty good ranking. Va. Tech really has everyone back on offense and Tyrod Taylor is going to be crazy good. TCU would be higher if I knew anything more than that they had a great 2009....

Thoughts on 2010?

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

Lane Kiffin to USC just gives me one more reason to hate USC. He is all hype...now he has to prove that he is worth it. He has a great staff and if Norm Chow moves across town then USC might conitue its dominance of the PAC 10 for the forseeable future.

In keeping with the PAC 10, I still cannot believe that Jake Locker is not going pro. This will probably be the last year NFL rookies are paid ridiculous sums.

Until the final day to declare for the draft it is tough to know what teams will do what next year.

"If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less" General Eric Shinseki

So, if someone offers you more money and a better platform for success in your career you... turn them down? Of course not. Kiffin did what anyone else in that situation would have done. At 34, he has a $4 mil salary and the keys to arguably the most envied college football program in the country. When it comes to Kiffin, people can cry and scream about loyalty, burning bridges, and all that BS, but when time comes to fire a coach, it's good riddence and on to the next savior.

I read somewhere that there is a possibility that the NCAA will be placing USC on probation. Also read that a couple important sign-ons are having second thoughts because of possible sanctions. But.......even with sanctions you can collect the big money while you are there.
_____

As a TENN alum who never wanted to fire Phil, nor hire lil' Lane, I could not be happier. He was bad news. I hope the AD Mike H. is out soon for this gaff. But regardless, hopefully now UTK will get a real coach and move on... I just hope we can still get some decent recruits... I am worried about that due to the timing of it all, but the timing is the only bad part IMO.

"Those who plan do better than those who do not plan, even though they rarely stick to their plan." - Winston Churchill

I find it a sad reflection on our society that not one D-I athlete was openly gay. I was a D-1 athlete, and although no one was openly gay on my team, I would like to believe that college kids are of a new mind that they wouldn't be bigoted... but I also understand how many people are still living in the 1930's...

Ahh well, good for Tressel!

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

It seems that the College Football world might be changing as we know it. With Nebraska probably moving to the Big 10 by Friday, with Missouri likely to follow, it seems that the Big 12 will not exist anymore as six teams are likely to move to the new Pac 10.

It shall be interesting... now can we all agree the Big 10 is the best conference in the Nation?

If the speculation plays out, then yes, it will be. By default as much as its own merit. And it is all the University of Texas' fault.

Because:
There will be blood between the University of Texas and the University of Southern California for control of the new conference - and I'm not talking on the athletic field.

Also, because Texas will be involved, I'd give the new Pac-10 megaconference 20 years, max, life. Texas destroys everything it gets its hands on, especially when they can't call the shots. The only reason the Southwest Conference lasted as long as it did was because Texas was able to call every shot. The SWC was the most corrupt conference in the history of collegiate athletics. Texas has tried to do the same to the Big 12, starting with forcing the Big 8 (especially Nebraska) to cave to every single damned demand just so the Big 12 merger could happen - academic partial qualifiers, the division alignment (intently ending the OU-Nebraska annual rivalry - which decided how many national championships over the last 40 years??), conference home office, the first conference chairman, etc. All of this, too, was after Texas' inquiries were rejected by the Pac-10 and the Big 10.

If Nebraska bolts, I don't blame them in the slightest. It's their final "f**** you" to Texas. The Big 12 sucks. I hate Texas (not really the school itself - just the arrogance and bullying of their athletics program). And I miss the Big 8.

I will pretend that your comments ended there and ignore that last part

Originally posted by TexanOkie

By default as much as its own merit.

I don't think by default, it sure seems Jim Delany is out to make this into a four conference world... although my dislike for the SEC is extremely high, the Big 12 has always been pretty okay to me. I can't understand why other schools would be in a conference that doesn't share revenue, but for Texas, I am sure the deal was great.

I don't think the Big 12 has a shot to exist after Friday. I just hope we don't go to the four mega-conference scenario.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

These speculated conference changes have me thinking of some very interesting rivalry series starting up - assuming that this plays out. the Cornhuskers will end their good rivalry with the Sooners, but will be bringing their 'N for Nowledge' to Iowa City, Minneapolis and ESPECIALLY Madison - there should be some gooooood games coming up!

And then add the Mizzou Tigers to the mix.

(hmmmm, the Big 13™???)

Farther east, I have heard chatter of NotreDame, Pitt and Rutgers - Big 16™ with two eight-team divisions, anyone?

These speculated conference changes have me thinking of some very interesting rivalry series starting up - assuming that this plays out. the Cornhuskers will end their good rivalry with the Sooners, but will be bringing their 'N for Nowledge' to Iowa City, Minneapolis and ESPECIALLY Madison - there should be some gooooood games coming up!

And then add the Mizzou Tigers to the mix.

(hmmmm, the Big 13™???)

Farther east, I have heard chatter of NotreDame, Pitt and Rutgers - Big 16™ with two eight-team divisions, anyone?

Mike

Add Syracuse and Maryland into the mix, too, as schools being talked about for the Big Ten. Nebraska is only the tip of the iceberg. I am reading that next the Big Ten will try to lure a Big East team or two to try to break Notre Dame loose to either bring it to 14 or 16 teams. If 16, then Missouri is more likely in the mix.

By the way, Colorado is joining the Pac 10 as of tomorrow, too. The Big 12 will be gone soon.

Pac-16? Yeah, but half the schools won't be in the Pacific Region
Big 16 - Up for grabs, more likely Big 10 will want it.
Big West? Already taken.
Great Western? Already taken.
Pacific & Western? Sounds like a railroad, not a collegiate athletics conference.
Great Northern? Was a railroad.

I second the vote for Big Midwest Conference. Although Power Conference has a nice ring to it as well

I don't know about "Power Conference"... when I agreed that the Big 10 would become the best conference yesterday, it had nothing to do with it's successes on the field - it had to do with moral high ground. If anything, the new Pac-? conference would be the "Power Conference", since it would almost certainly have a lock on California and Texas recruiting.

I don't know about "Power Conference"... when I agreed that the Big 10 would become the best conference yesterday, it had nothing to do with it's successes on the field - it had to do with moral high ground. If anything, the new Pac-? conference would be the "Power Conference", since it would almost certainly have a lock on California and Texas recruiting.

USC is going to be down for a bit after the 2 year ban in bowl games... it hasn't hit them yet, but it will for recruiting. Oregon lost its best player, Washington might be decent... otherwise, it will be Oklahoma and Texas just like the Big12. Am I missing something or does Cal, Stanford, and Arizona make it powerful?

Let us use last years final rankings....

Pac-Whatever
2. Texas
11. Oregon (won't be nearly as good next year without misouli)
21. Texas Tech (won't be good period.)
22. USC (going to be hurting with the penalties it faces in scholarships, loss of Carroll, etc.)

Let's say that the SEC does make a grab for Va Tech, Georgia Tech, and Miami, instead of Texas A&M like the reports are saying. Pretty crazy how good the SEC would be. I would obviously like to see the SEC sit and do nothing... so we can beat them again at everything (not just basketball).

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

What happens to KU, KSU, ISU, Mizzou, and Baylor? I can't imagine five major-conference schools suddenly dropping to mid-majors. Considering KU men's basketball and ISU wrestling and women's basketball (I know, I know) it doesn't seem right for those two to be downgraded.

What I don't get is that conference and schools want money but they also want wins - that's why Nebraska and the other big boys play SE Michigan Tech and whatever for their first non-conference games; wins! You know the system is set up wrong when wins are more important than quality games. Case in point - ISU is the closest D1 school to U of MN yet they refuse to play each other in non-conference games because neither team is guaranteed a win. Even though it would be sold out at either location, a win is more important.

Also, because Texas will be involved, I'd give the new Pac-10 megaconference 20 years, max, life. Texas destroys everything it gets its hands on, especially when they can't call the shots. The only reason the Southwest Conference lasted as long as it did was because Texas was able to call every shot. The SWC was the most corrupt conference in the history of collegiate athletics. Texas has tried to do the same to the Big 12, starting with forcing the Big 8 (especially Nebraska) to cave to every single damned demand just so the Big 12 merger could happen - academic partial qualifiers, the division alignment (intently ending the OU-Nebraska annual rivalry - which decided how many national championships over the last 40 years??), conference home office, the first conference chairman, etc. All of this, too, was after Texas' inquiries were rejected by the Pac-10 and the Big 10.

This reminds of many years ago when I was at UCLA. Texas came to play UCLA and went away mad. The game was played at the Coliseum and only about 50,000 people showed up (nobody on the west coast really cares a bit about UT). Since the stadium holds about 100,000 the Texas coach (Daryl Royal? if I remember correctly) had a hissy fit. "Texas doesn't play in front of empty seats," he said, and swore that Texas would never be back. I'm looking forward to the new era. Not.

This reminds of many years ago when I was at UCLA. Texas came to play UCLA and went away mad. The game was played at the Coliseum and only about 50,000 people showed up (nobody on the west coast really cares a bit about UT). Since the stadium holds about 100,000 the Texas coach (Daryl Royal? if I remember correctly) had a hissy fit. "Texas doesn't play in front of empty seats," he said, and swore that Texas would never be back. I'm looking forward to the new era. Not.

This kind of mentality, in my experience, is prevalent amongst UT grads and fans.

Off-topic:

It is also reflective of Austinites and their views of their fair city. All my Austin hate in the past isn't really hatred of Austin. Austin's completely livable (it's pretty - at least in terms of the natural environment - and there's the same amenities you'll find in similar-sized metros). It's just that the populace has that same kind of overinflated ego and opinion of itself, and they promulgate it to the extreme.

I think we've discussed this before but everywhere has that mentality. I don't think Austin is any worse than, say, Boulder, or Tempe.

I don't know about Tempe. Even in Arizona, no one brags about being from Tempe. When I lived there and I would visit on the east coast I would tell people I lived in Phoenix. Unless you were a university or sports nut people always got Tucson and Tempe confused. I have never heard anyone ask if Colorado State was in Boulder or A&M was in Austin.

I am with TexOkie on this one, I have met a few people from Austin and their is a level of pride that is associated with it, more so than with other cities, college or otherwise.

"If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less" General Eric Shinseki